Over the last six months, Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX), along with other members of the House Judiciary Committee, have engaged in an all-out effort to turn back the clock on our immigration laws through a series of bills that may tackle one issue at a time, but equal a comprehensive overhaul. This week, the restrictionists' Comprehensive Immigration Reform package (RCIR, as we call it) became complete with the introduction of the "Hinder the Administration's Legalization Temptation Act" (HALT Act), a bill that would suspend discretionary forms of immigration relief until January 21, 2013. Yes, until the day after the next inauguration.
Just yesterday, Congressman Smith inched a bit closer to RCIR when the full Judiciary Committee voted to advance the "Keep Our Communities Safe Act of 2011" (H.R. 1932) -- a bill that authorizes indefinite detention for immigrants. Apparently Smith is not content with the current mandatory detention laws because they include some provisions for release of immigrants, such as asylum seekers and others who have committed no crimes. His bill, however, would create a penal system for immigrants far more restrictive than the current detention system, which has generally been under fire from all sides.
And it doesn't stop there. Other bills in the RCIR package include mandatory E-verify with no provisions for current undocumented workers to become legal, elimination of the diversity visa, expanded authority for the Secretary of Homeland Security to revoke visas issued by the Department of State, the elimination of review for those visas, suspension of waivers for the 3 and 10 year bars, suspension of cancellation of removal, suspension of Temporary Protective Status (TPS), suspension of virtually all parole authority, deferral powers, and work authorization, and a revocation of any such benefits that are awarded between the date of introduction of the HALT Act and its enactment.
Taken together, this package of proposals does more than enshrine the status quo. It literally rewrites the 1996 immigration laws that Smith himself authored. He has justified the HALT Act, in particular, as an attempt to head off possible "backdoor amnesty" by the Obama Administration, fearing that Obama would use his executive branch authority to defer the removal of thousands of DREAM Act eligible students and other vulnerable persons caught in the crush of our broken immigration system. Despite the fact that A) the Obama Administration has repeatedly said it had no plans to use its authority in this way (even though it certainly could) and B) Smith himself asked then Attorney General Janet Reno to exercise prosecutorial discretion in a 1999 letter, Smith continues to let loose one hysterical tirade after another any time the possibility of any relief for any immigrant is suggested.
The tremendous irony of the HALT Act, however, is that it actually reinforces the president's authority to take action by highlighting the number of areas where discretion currently exists in existing immigration law. His fear that the president might act has led him to relentlessly strip away every possible discretionary action except that of declining to put people in immigration proceedings (and even that he attempted to curtail by suspending formal deferred action authority and eliminating work authorization in the case of deferrals). In his efforts to block the Obama administration at every turn, he has excised the notion of discretion from the immigration laws, but in doing so he has pointed out just how necessary discretion is.
For instance, the HALT Act would suspend all grants of TPS between now and January 21, 2013. Heaven forbid that a natural disaster or civil war breaks out anywhere in the world because under the HALT Act, we would be powerless to help victims -- like we did for Haitians after a devastating earthquake -- stranded in the U.S. Similarly, by suspending cancellation of removal, Smith strikes at one of the very few safety valves currently in the system -- a provision of relief that has existed in some form since at least the 1952 immigration law by which an immigration judge determines that someone was removable but also finds that he or she merits suspension of that removal and permanent resident status based on compelling humanitarian circumstances.
Moreover, the HALT Act would eliminate even the potential for family members to be reunited who are subject to the 3 and 10 year bars. For example, if your spouse entered the country illegally, met you, fell in love, and wanted to get right with the law, there would be absolutely no way that he/she could obtain legal status unless he/she waited outside the country for 3 to 10 years. Despite the fact that Congressman Smith's own 1996 law created both the bar and the waiver, the Congressman thinks that it is better to keep everyone from even having a chance to reunite in order to punish the Obama administration.
The restrictionists' CIR package really only leaves one recourse -- mass deportation -- which would be both impractical and expensive given that a mass deportation is estimated to cost at least $285 billion over five years. As the U.S. teeters on the brink of another financial crisis, the irresponsibility and craven politics of the HALT Act and the restrictionists' CIR package is a sad reminder that a broken immigration system requires solutions that embrace discretion, not eliminate it.
Cross-posted at Immigration Impact and Daily Kos.
Follow Mary Giovagnoli on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ImmPolicyCenter
At $14,250 per deportation I'm guessing that mass deportations are going to be about 10 times cheaper than amnesty would be.
The furore about SB1070 and all the protestations about pre-emption conveninetly ignore the facts that:
1. In 2002 the DOJ confirmed state and city police's rights to enforce criminal and civil infractions of federal Immigration law
2. ALL court cases heard to date have been dismissed for failing to make any case against SB1070.
2. Don't tell provisions of sanctuary policies ARE direct pre-emption of federal laws!
SB1070 and the current slew of state legislation are in fact simply new laws to ensure that existing laws be enforced!
As far as falling in love with an illegal
1. follow him or her when they are deported. No one here is separating families. They do that voluntarily then accuse the US of dividing families for a good sob story.
2. IF you fell in love with a bank robber, could you cry when he was sent to jail that you are being separated? Illegals know what the penalty is for crossing the border.
3. I do not feel I should be paying American citizens to have children they cannot afford to feed, cloth or educated, I resent our government and court that insist we must allow an invasion of leeches in to live off my tax dollars here.
Americans have spoken....send them home... no amnesty except to those willing to serve active duty ( no sponsorship of anyone here illegally allowed)
Immigration is considered to be a civil matter, so do not mix it with bank robbery. To deport American citizen child's parents is the same as imprison person for parking ticket for the next 10 years.
Sounds like you just gave us justification of allowing the familes to remain together...in their country of origin.
"Immigration is considered to be a civil matter" Only to the open borders crowd, It is against the law to be here illegally. It is against the law to work here illegally. It is against the to steal IDs. It is gainst the law to drive without a livense and/or insurance.
How would you justify all those illegal acts as just a "civil matter"?
We already allow more legal immigrants then the rest of the world does.......combined.
We already are facing shortages of water, every energy product, good land, etc.
We are paving over farmland and open spaces to build houses and strip malls.
We have doubled our population TWICE over the last 100 years. Just the same as the world has. Given that over 80% of our growth is from immigration we need to decide just how populous do we wish to become? do we want to look like China and India did just a short time ago? We are slated to add another 300 million people without any amnesty, pathway, increases in legal immigration or other changes. Most of the states are facing water shortages at 310 million, how will we double our demand and not lower our quality of life?
I'm all for conservation and going green. But I don't want to spend a fortune doing it to only find ourselves going backwards due to massive population increases.
Just as cities are forced to show they have the infrastructure BEFORE they can allow construction to occur (growth management act) the country should also show they can provide services BEFORE we allow the tens of millions coming to stay.
You're funny! So witty, so charming, so........so something.
The first sign of a loosing argument - attack the messenger, not the message.
INA Act of 1986 had failed resulting in current immigration mess that is only growing bigger and bigger day after day. Laws are being changed all the time. INA Act of 1986 deports mothers of American citizens, fathers of American citizens, daughters and sons of American citizens, spouses of American citizens, family members of American military. INA Act of 1986 is outdated and needs to be updated.
It's not the Republicans holding up immigration reform. The reform that the people need is not the amnesty that the Congressional Dems and this administration are pushing. The Dems are more in the way of real, honest reform than anyone else because they are dishonestly pushing amnesty and calling it reform. When the Dems start being honest and propose some actual reform that works for Americans rather than rewarding the dishonest foreign nationals here illegally at our direct expense, then maybe we'll get what we need rather than them pandering to the dishonest people who support the lawbreakers.
Here is what I would propose:
Protect the borders. Any sovereign nation must be able to control its borders.
Develop and ENFORCE a guest worker program for anyone who enters the country in an organized and legal way to do productive work.
Enforce current laws by penalizing employers who hire illegal workers. E-verify is a good system and it works most of the time. If there are problems with it, let’s fix them, but let us not “throw the baby out with the bathwater.”
Youngsters who were born in this country of illegal immigrants and who have lived here all of their lives can EARN citizenship by military or other service to the nation and by following a set of specified steps such as learning to speak and write English, having no criminal record (felonies), etc.
People becoming citizens using the above route cannot expedite the path to citizenship for their parents or extended family members.
Illegal immigration has cost the US plenty. If you have doubts watch the following:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLJxmJZXgNI
Follow One Man Roaring on Twitter: http://twitter.com/omroaring
but it is so simple that we can make the country life easier and the people also by just adjusting the things that are attracting to the country by 1-education , 2-health and 3- work ,,
if we stop allowing the undocumented from this 3 thing our future will be easier also the hope for the people to come and live here will be less ,,
we attract people by facilitating the life for them illegaly and we make it hard for them by the Law to become legal ,,, the only way is by Lottery or Marriage , both are not Garantie for normal way , we need a better immigration system , illegall or undocumented who can't win a lottery or get married with american , they need different way to Say we are here we want to be legal ,,
If you come here illegally and squat out a baby ... go home and take it with you.